W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2009

Re: Recent Selectors API Updates (was: Call for Consensus - Selectors Last Call)

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:50:55 +0100
Message-ID: <497F113F.40805@lachy.id.au>
To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, public-webapps@w3.org

Cameron McCormack wrote:
> Cameron McCormack:
>>> * In section 6, I don’t think it’s necessary to explicitly mention
>>>   undefined, since it’s already handled by the annotation in the
>>>   IDL.  If you do want to include this in the prose, I think it
>>>   needs to be qualified to say that this applies to an ECMAScript
>>>   language binding of the interface.  (null’s OK, since you can
>>>   talk about null at the level of IDL values so it’s applicable to
>>>   any language.)
> 
> Lachlan Hunt:
>> I don't see why this is a problem.  Technically both null and undefined  
>> are handled by the IDL, but stating it implicitly in the prose makes it  
>> clearer.
> 
> I don’t mind it being repeated.

I got convinced on IRC that the redundancy isn't good and so I've now 
removed the statement entirely.

I've also updated the IDL to include the [ImplementedOn=] extended 
attribute and replaced the preceding prose about it being implemented on 
those interfaces.

Finally, I updated the Terminology and Conventions section to define 
that the interfaces referred to in the spec come from DOM3Core.

http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api/

-- 
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2009 13:51:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:29 GMT